Are movies better than books? Or are books better than movies?
This is the never-ending argumentative debate between movie watchers and book readers. You fellow readers already know the answer to this. Never judge a book by its movie, I like to whisper to myself whenever I watch a rather disappointing movie. Even when you watch the movie before reading the book, you will come to conclude that the book is greatly better. We cannot deny that there are some good movies made after their books; however, the book will always win. You read the books, and they are fantastic and magical in an indescribable way. Then when the movie is released you go watch it. You enter the theater excited and full of hopes, but you come out disappointed, wondering what the directors and screenwriters were thinking. How dare they ruin an exceptional piece of literature?
Why do movies disappoint us?
Movies are never as good as the book because they simply make too many changes. There are numerous movies out there that come from spectacular books. And yes, non-readers might like the movie or even love it, but the readers know better.
We know that the book is a 10 and the movie is a five. We do get excited when they make a movie out of the book, but, somehow, we are always disappointed after watching it. We can’t help it but point out all the changes they made, how they took out some symbolic or special parts and how they sometimes even change a character’s personality, creating a total stranger. For us every little detail is important, but in a movie, that’s not appreciated as the process of converting a book into a movie changes several aspects and deletes numerous scenes, leaving us unhappy.
Movies cannot develop the plot and characters the same way as a book. Movies usually last about 2 hours, while a book can be 725, more or less, pages full of magic. Books are full of detail: page after page builds up a masterpiece. Imagine trying to fit 725 pages into a two-hour film; that is tough work when you consider the average amount of time a movie watcher is willing to sit through a movie is of 130 minutes. Books give you an intimate look into the characters, their background and their personality, while movies simply don’t have time for all of that. And if it’s set into a fictional or alternative universe, movies don’t have the time to give much background of this world the story is set in, while the book does.
Authors do not write the book knowing that someday it will make it to the big screen. Authors write stories out of their imagination. Storylines make more sense in the written form because the author was initially telling a story, not writing a movie script for a visual form. aThis factor will always make books better than movies. Think of an iceberg: the movie is just the small part on the surface, and the book is the whole thing.
“The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones” was a film released in 2013. It was adapted from the book “City of Bones”, the first book of The Mortal Instruments series by Cassandra Clare. The series is a New York Times bestseller that has had great success. The film, however, did not meet expectations. Though there were some talented actors such as the lovely Lily Collins, the film did not make it far. Due to the first film failure, a second movie was never made.
The film, however, did not meet expectations. Though there were some talented actors such as Lily Collins, it did not make it far. Due to the first film’s failure, a second movie was never made.
Yes, movies can be great. You can watch a movie and say: wow this was awesome. I am not saying all movies are awful. Movies can be good too. But they will simply never be as good as the book for many reasons. This can be tested at any time. Just grab a book, read it and then watch the movie.
We, book readers, even have a saying: “You haven’t felt true pain until your favorite book gets made into the crappiest movie ever”.